The Updated CDC SSI Prevention Guidelines are (Finally) Released: A Marathon in its Own Right
(First, thanks to Dan, Eli, and Mike for inviting me to join the blogging crew. I hope I can meet their outstanding level of performance, and I promise not to write only about healthcare worker influenza vaccination [but I am sure it may come up now and then!])
Last weekend I ran my first half marathon, the St. Jude
Nashville Rock ‘n Roll Half Marathon. As I ran the
race, I went through several stages: excitement combined with anxiety before
the start, the adrenaline rush during the first few miles, the sense of
accomplishment at mile 6, the shear exhaustion of mile 11, the exhilaration of
finally finishing, and then the realization of “what’s next?”
With the much anticipated release of the CDC’s HICPAC Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection (which updates the 1999
guideline), I realized the guideline authors may have had the same thoughts
during its development that I had during my race. (Disclaimer: Dan, Hilary, and I served on HICPAC
during the development of this guideline).
This guideline is long overdue, particularly with the increased focus on
reducing SSIs combined with the advances in SSI prevention over the past
decade. The writing group consisted of experts in infection prevention,
surgical sciences, infectious diseases, and public health, and they should be
lauded for their extremely tireless and dedicated work (which we saw first hand
at HICPAC). Just as with my race, the process was likely exciting,
rewarding, exhausting, and, I suspect, at times frustrating.
There are important things to recognize when reviewing these
new guidelines, outlined in the commentary by Dr. Lipsett. First, we must understand the evidence
inclusion criteria for each section. For the Core Practices section, only
randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews were included. For the Prosthetic Joint Arthroplasty section,
due to a lack of such high level studies in the literature
for many of the key questions, other types of studies were allowed. This resulted in limitations to the
scope of the recommended practices and many “no recommendation/unresolved issue”
decisions on key questions such as the timing and redosing of antibiotic prophylaxis. Other key questions never made it that far,
reflecting a paucity of science on these topics. In addition, detailed guidance on
implementation is not present in the guideline or supplementary materials. Hidden in the Supplementary Material, the
guideline does note those key practices recommended in the 1999 Guideline that
were not included in the update but still apply to the surgical patient today
(see pages 41-42).
Despite these limitations, there are some significant
advances recommended (Category 1A), including expansion of
several key interventions to a broader surgical population:
1) Glucose control (<200 mg/dL) for diabetic and
nondiabetic patients
2) Maintenance of normothermia
3) Provision of increased FiO2 in intubated
surgical patients with normal pulmonary function
Traditionally, these interventions have been used in
specific surgical procedures, such as colorectal and cardiac surgery. With the new guidelines, many healthcare
facilities will need to broaden these interventions to a wider surgical
population. Importantly, the guideline minimizes the commonly heard refrain of the need for studies in a
specific surgical procedure before implementation of an intervention. The pathophysiology of a SSI is probably the same for most surgical patients, supporting the expansion of these important
interventions to a wider population. In addition,
the guidelines now recommend stopping antimicrobial prophylaxis once the
incision is closed in clean and clean-contaminated procedures (vs. the tradition
of continuing for 24hrs, 48hrs, or until all drains have been removed), an
important recommendation in the era of antibiotic stewardship.
Much like running a half marathon, we are now at the finish
line and asking the question “[w]hat’s next?”
While the new guidelines advance SSI prevention, there is a clear need
for implementation guidance related to the recommended practices (such as from
SHEA, APIC and others), research funding to support high-level studies
that examine key questions for which there was not an adequate evidence base,
and expert direction on those strategies that will never be studied by
randomized control trials. Guideline’s
finally out. Let’s get running!!
Comments
Post a Comment
Thanks for submitting your comment to the Controversies blog. To reduce spam, all comments will be reviewed by the blog moderator prior to publishing. However, all legitimate comments will be published, whether they agree with or oppose the content of the post.